Live data from Hacker News

How the AI Bubble Bursts

martinvol.pe

111–120 of 557 posts

Re: How the AI Bubble Bursts

#112
post #31

> They lose a big customer for their cloud services. Even worse considering that now, using the AI they helped fund, everyone can compete with their sub-par products. GitHub is a good candidate for disruption, and that’d be just the start. Look, I'm a Microsoft hater like the rest of us, but calling Microsoft's products sub-par discredits the author a good bit. I invite anyone who thinks this to try and compete with…

I'm sure Word is full of arcane backwards compatible tricks that 20% of users use, but I find it hard to differentiate the Pareto 80% of the product from Google Docs or any other competitor (LibreOffice?) Adding rich text, tables, headings and colors is pretty much a solved problem for all of these softwares. Adding images or handling more complex layouts sucks everywhere, it's not like that Word has a great user experience and the other don't. All of them are bad. IMHO, if we had any of the competitors being the de-facto standard for word processing, the vast majority of users wouldn't feel the difference. Power users would for sure, but I'm not sure they're many or they use existential features. If Word didn't have a near monopoly in office settings due to aggressive marketing, OS presence and a proprietary file format that constantly changes and never renders well outside of Microsoft products, it could disappear without anyone (save Microsoft) losing much.

Re: How the AI Bubble Bursts

#113
post #52
post #30

It’s incredible how polarizing the AI rush is. I keep the perspective that the technology is an absolute step change but I have no idea where the cards will fall. I take a lot of issue with these style of articles. I get a sense that the authors are being overly defensive. The cost to serve tokens is absolutely profitable today and that’s been true for at least a year. What’s unclear is how R&D and capex fit into the…

> The cost to serve tokens is absolutely profitable today How can you possibly say that? Everyone knows that's not the case, these companies are losing money every day selling tokens. Revenue is not the same thing as profit.

I think they’re losing money because they have to amortize the costs of training the models in the first place, which is where most of the resource sink is.

This is why they were freaking out about DeepSeek just taking the trained model weights and slapping an interface on it.

Re: How the AI Bubble Bursts

#114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to be uneducated to even read an “AI is bubble article”. Anyone working this stuff knows how much more compute we need.

Two things can be true at the same time: - AI is a genuinely transformative technology on par with the internet and on track to probably surpass the smartphone - The inflated valuations, the circular flows of money (or "money"), and the financial cup-shell game mean that the players of the game are all a few bad weeks away from catastrophe. This is, of course, nothing new for SV -- but the scale this time is new. Som…

Yes. Both things can be true at the same time.

The question is when will the frontier AI companies turn a profit on said transformative technology since other than NVIDIA and big tech, it is losing them tens of billions and who will survive a crash when it comes.

This is when you know you are in a bubble when people with a clear financial incentive are going on to newsletters, podcasts and posting extremely outlandish predictions to sell the public on something.

The amount of engineers becoming snake-oil salesmen and vibe-coders becoming cybersecurity experts overnight selling AI courses is a good indicator which I am looking at.

Re: How the AI Bubble Bursts

#115
post #79

This article tries to build upon a lot of half-truths or incorrect facts, like this: > OpenAI is struggling to monetize. They turned to showing ads in ChatGPT, The ads aren’t going into your paid plans (except maybe a highly discounted tier, depending on the market). The ads are a play to offer a free version. Having an ad-supported free tier isn’t new. The discussion about being unprofitable also repeats the reducti…

> The ads aren’t going into your paid plans (except maybe a highly discounted tier, depending on the market). The ads are a play to offer a free version. Having an ad-supported free tier isn’t new. Sounds like it is new for ChatGPT though. That's also how it started with TV and Youtube, first on the free tier then expanding to the paid ones.

YouTube, Spotify, and most video steamers have zero ads on paid tiers. I never see video ads.

Re: How the AI Bubble Bursts

#116
Excellent reading to realize how the rich greedy investment monkeys with no plan other than "let's build a data center" will ultimately drag the market and the economy down. This time it may not explode as abruptly as in dotcom era, but will slowly sink as the stupid US data center boom proves unprofitable. Billions burned for nothing more than a run for the money.

Re: How the AI Bubble Bursts

#117
post #30

It’s incredible how polarizing the AI rush is. I keep the perspective that the technology is an absolute step change but I have no idea where the cards will fall. I take a lot of issue with these style of articles. I get a sense that the authors are being overly defensive. The cost to serve tokens is absolutely profitable today and that’s been true for at least a year. What’s unclear is how R&D and capex fit into the…

Demand of tokens is absolutely skyrocketing. And unlike the traditional "this will replace humans right away", I think what this introduce is a lot of incentive to spread those token in places where there was never any incentive to hire a software engineer for previously. In turn, that will drive a lot of business activity in those area that will potentially fail given the current quality of the output. This feels li…

Tulips sales also skyrocketed.

Seriously, what value are tokens providing other than justifying layoffs. Concretely. Today. Not in the speculating scenario that cardiologist could be replaced with models.

We see this new trend of agentic coding, again a promise software will be written that way going forward, despite the number of fiasco already experienced when trusting a model turned bad. The use case may provide value, but right now all it does is fullfil the push for token consumption all these AI leaders are advocating for.

Re: How the AI Bubble Bursts

#118

This article tries to build upon a lot of half-truths or incorrect facts, like this: > OpenAI is struggling to monetize. They turned to showing ads in ChatGPT, The ads aren’t going into your paid plans (except maybe a highly discounted tier, depending on the market). The ads are a play to offer a free version. Having an ad-supported free tier isn’t new. The discussion about being unprofitable also repeats the reducti…

> Having an ad-supported free tier isn’t new having ads shoved in paid tiers isn't new either

Re: How the AI Bubble Bursts

#119

> RAM prices are crashing because new models won’t need as much Reality begs to differ [0] and following the link for that text goes to an article [1] where they talk about Google's TurboQuant which supposedly will lower the RAM requirements. Now if that means RAM prices come down (as speculated, not reported on, in the link) or the AI companies just do more things with their extra ram is yet to be determined. The fa…

If the gains are real why the limits are so bad? Google can barely serve Anti-gravity.

Isn't that at the moment still a free product? Of course they will not prioritize serving those requests. That tells you nothing.

Re: How the AI Bubble Bursts

#120
post #30

It’s incredible how polarizing the AI rush is. I keep the perspective that the technology is an absolute step change but I have no idea where the cards will fall. I take a lot of issue with these style of articles. I get a sense that the authors are being overly defensive. The cost to serve tokens is absolutely profitable today and that’s been true for at least a year. What’s unclear is how R&D and capex fit into the…

This is a classic HN mistaking the map for the territory. R&D and capex absolutely figure into de-facto profitability and sustainability for AI labs, despite their separate treatment in accounting. > well most of us here on HN have benefited from decades of overinflated engineering salaries being paid by often companies that were not profitable and not only unprofitable This is a really concerning perspective: people…

> any company ingesting that much cash needs to justify its capacity to survive.

What, why? There are tons of low-margin capex-intensive business out there.

I think AI will end up like being like hosting. All the models will converge to being pretty-decent and the companies will have to compete on efficiency since they are selling a generic commodity.

You can already see Anthropic fears this scenario since they try so hard to make people use their first-party tools rather than plugging Claude in as a generic part of a third-party stack.

LLM hosting is the next VPS.

Post reply on HN